Skip to main content
Log in

A research framework for group support systems

  • Published:
Group Decision and Negotiation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Over the last decade, many methodologies and techniques have been devised to improve the efficiency and effectiveness of cooperative working. The efficacy of many of these approaches has not been rigorously assessed, causing doubt about their applicability and helping restrict their use. Additionally, research effort has been dissipated. The need is for a generally agreed framework within which research can be conducted and results determined. This article proposes such a framework, involving the identification of the context, process, and outcome variables which, a priori, are deemed important to understanding, and subsequently predicting, the appropriate forms of intervention in the workings of groups.

Six major components have been identified: the organizational environment, the group context, the process context, the group process, the substantive outcomes, and process performance indicators. Within these six components, 16 macrovariables have been identified. Within these macrovariables, 90 variables have been selected that characterize an issue-handling situation and its outcomes. The framework is applicable to a very wide range of group support systems used in many contexts.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • AntonyR. N. (1965).Planning and Control Systems: A Framework for Analysis. Boston: Harvard Business School Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • BeachL. R., and T. R.Mitchell. (1978). “A Contingency Model for the Selection of Decision Strategies,”Academic Management Review 3(3), 439–449.

    Google Scholar 

  • BaskinO. W., and C. E.Aronoff. (1980).Interpersonal Communication in Organizations. Santa Monica, CA: Goodyear Publishing Co. Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bostrom, B., and V. Clawson. (1992).Groupware Report, Arizona (preview issue) 8–9.

  • BrownR. (1988).Group Processes: Dynamics Within and Between Groups. Oxford, UK: Basil Blackwell Ltd.

    Google Scholar 

  • ChecklandP. (1981).Systems Thinking, Systems Practice. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • CollinsB. E., and H.Guetzkow (1964)A Social Psychology of Group Processes for Decision Making New York: John Wiley & Sons.

    Google Scholar 

  • ConnollyT., L. M.Jessup, and J. S.Valacich. (1990). “Effects of Anonymity and Evaluative Tone on Idea Generation in Computer-Mediated Groups”Management Science 36(6) (June), 689–703.

    Google Scholar 

  • DeSanctisG., and R. B.Gallupe. (1987). “Foundation for the Study of GDSS”Management Science 33, 589–609.

    Google Scholar 

  • DennisA. R., J. F.George, L. M.Jessup, J. F.NunamakerJr. and D. R.Vogel. (1988). “I.T. to Support Electronic Meetings,”MIS Quarterly 12(2), 591–624.

    Google Scholar 

  • Duncan, R. B. (1972). “Characteristics of Organizational Environments and Perceived Environmental Uncertainty,”Administrative Science Quarterly, 313–327.

  • EdenC. (1988). “Cognitive Mapping,European Journal of Operational Research 36, 1–13.

    Google Scholar 

  • EdenC. (1990). “The Unfolding Nature of GDS—Two Dimensions of Skills.” In C.Eden and J.Radford (eds.),Tackling Strategic Problems—The Role of Group Decision Support. London: Sage Publications, chapter 5.

    Google Scholar 

  • EdenC., S.Jones, and D.Sims. (1986). “Messing About in Problems: An Informal Structured Approach to their Identification and Management.” InFrontiers of Operational Research and Applied Systems Analysis, Volume 1. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • EdenC. (1992). “A Framework for Thinking about GDSS,”Group Decision and Negotiation 1, 199–218.

    Google Scholar 

  • Facilitator. (1992). Personal Communication: Comments made by a number of trained facilitators to a discussion document on the framework.

  • Finlay, P.N. (1991). “Measures of Success in MSS,” Loughborough University Business School Working Paper No. 5.

  • FriendJ. K., and A.Hickling. (1987).Planning Under Pressure—The Strategic Choice Approach. Oxford, UK: Pergamon Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • FriendJ. (1990). “Handling Organizational Complexity in Group Decision Support.” In C.Eden and J.Radford (eds.),Tackling Strategic Problems—The Role of Group Decision Support. London: Sage Publications, Chapter 2.

    Google Scholar 

  • GallupeR. B., and G.DeSanctis. (1988). “Computer-based Support for Group Problem-Finding: An Experimental Investigation,”MIS Quarterly 12(2), 277–296.

    Google Scholar 

  • GearA. E., and M. J.Read. (1993). “Using Team Worker for Management Meetings,”OR Insight 6 (2) (April/June), 24–28.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gilmer B.vonHaller. (1971).Industrial and Organizational Psychology. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • GlickW. H. (1985). “Conceptualizing and Measuring Organizational and Psychological Climate: Pitfalls in Multilevel Research,”Academy of Management Review 10(3), 601–616.

    Google Scholar 

  • GrayP., and L.Olfman. (1989). “The User Inteface in GDSS,”Decision Support Systems 5, 119–137.

    Google Scholar 

  • GrayP., D.Vogel, and R.Beauclair. (1990). “Assessing GDSS Empirical Research,”European Journal of Operational Research 46, 162–176.

    Google Scholar 

  • GorryG.A., and M. S.Scott Morton. (1971). “A Framework for MIS,”Sloan Management Review 13 (1) (Fall), 55–70.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gorry, G. A., and M. S. Scott Morton. (1989). “A Framework for MIS,”Sloan Management Classic Review (Spring), 49–61.

  • HallR. H. (1974).Organizations: Structure and Process London: Prentice-Hall International Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • HandyC. B. (1981).Understanding Organizations. Harmondsworth, UK: Penguin, pp. 175–185.

    Google Scholar 

  • HuberG. P. (1984). “Issues in the Design of Group Decision Support Systems,”MIS Quarterly 8, 195–204.

    Google Scholar 

  • IvesB., S.Hamilton, and G. B.Davis. (1980). “A Framework for Research in Computer-Based MIS,”Management Science 26 (9) (September), 910–934.

    Google Scholar 

  • JamesL. R., and A. P.Jones. (1976). “Organizational Structure: A Review of Structural Dimensions and Their Conceptual Relationships with Individual Attitudes and Behaviour,”Organizational Behaviour and Human Performance 16, 74–113.

    Google Scholar 

  • JarvenpaaS. L., V. S.Rao, and G. P.Huber. (1988). “Computer Support for Meetings of Groups Working on Unstructured Problems: A Field Experiment,”MIS Quarterly 12 (2), 645–666.

    Google Scholar 

  • JelassiM. T., and A.Foroughi. (1989). “Negotiation Support Systems: An Overview of Design Issues and Existing Software,”Decision Support Systems 5, 167–181.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jessup, L. M., T. Connolly, and J. Galegher. (1990). “The Effects of Anonymity on GDSS Group Process with an Idea-Generating Task,”MIS Quarterly (September), 313–321.

  • JessupL. M., and D. A.Tansik. (1991). “Decision Making in an Automated Environment: The Effects of Anonymity and Proximity with a GDSS”Decision Sciences 22(2), 266–279.

    Google Scholar 

  • JohnsonG., and K.Scholes. (1984).Exploring Corporate Strategy. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall International Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • KatzD., and R. L.Kahn. (1966).The Social Psychology of Organizations. New York: John Wiley & Sons Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • KeenP. G. W. (1986).Justifying Decision Support Systems. In R.SpragueJr. and H. J.Watson (eds.),Decision Support Systems: Putting Theory into Practice. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • KeenP. G. W., and M. S.Scott Morton. (1978).Decision Support Systems: An Organizational Perspective. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • KerrS. (ed.) (1979).Organizational Behaviour. Ohio: Grid Publishing Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • KraemerK. L., and J. L.King. (1988). “Computer-Based systems for Co-operative Work and Group Decisionmaking,”ACM Computing Surveys 20(2) (June), 115–146.

    Google Scholar 

  • Luce, R. D., and H. Raiffia. (1957).Games and Decisions. New York: ????

  • LuftJ. (1984).Group Processes: An Introduction to Group Dynamics, 3rd ed. California: Mayfield Publishing Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • LuthansF., and R.Kreitner. (1985).Organizational Behaviour Modification and Beyond. Glenview, IL: Scott Foresman.

    Google Scholar 

  • MasonR. O., and I. I.Mitroff. (1973). “A Program for Research on MIS,”Management Science 19 (5) (January), 475–487.

    Google Scholar 

  • MartzW. B.Jr., D. R.Vogel, and J. F.NunamakerJr. (1992). “Electronic Meeting Systems: Results from the field,”Decision Support Systems 8, 141–158.

    Google Scholar 

  • McCarrtA. T., and J.Rohrbaugh. (1989). “Evaluating GDSS Effectiveness: A Performance Study of Decision Conferencing,”Decision Support Systems 5, 243–253.

    Google Scholar 

  • McGrathJ. E. (1984).Groups: Interaction and Performance. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • MitchellT. R. (1982).People In Organizations—An Introduction to Organizational Behaviour. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • NunamakerJ., D.Vogel, A.Heminger, B.Martz, R.Grohowski, and C.McGoff. (1989). “Experiences at IBM with Group Support Systems: A Field Study,”Decision Support Systems 5, 183–196.

    Google Scholar 

  • NunamakerJ. F.Jr., L. M.Applegate, and B.Konsynski. (1988). “Computer-Aided Deliberation: Model Management and Group Decisions Support,”Journal of Operational Research 6, 826–848.

    Google Scholar 

  • OkunM. and F.DiVesta. (1975). “Cooperation and Competition in Coacting Groups,”Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 31, 615–620.

    Google Scholar 

  • PinsonneaultA., and K. L.Kraemer. (1989). “The Impact of Technological Support on Groups: An Assessment of the Empirical Research,”Decision Support Systems 5, 197–216.

    Google Scholar 

  • ReaganP., and J.Rohrbaugh. (1990). “Group Decision Process Effectiveness—A Competing Values Approach,”Group and Organizational Studies 15(1), 20–43.

    Google Scholar 

  • RadfordK. J. (1978).Information Systems for Strategic Decisions. Reston Publishing Co. Inc. Virginia:

    Google Scholar 

  • RobinsonM. (1990). “Double Level Languages and Co-operative Working,”AI Society 6, 23–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • SimonH. A. (1960).The New Science of Management Decision. New York: Harper & Row, pp. 5–6.

    Google Scholar 

  • ShawM. E. (1976).Group Dynamics: The Psychology of Small Group Behaviour. New York: McGraw-Hill Book Co.

    Google Scholar 

  • SiegelJ., V.Dubrovsky, S.Kiesler, and T. W.McGuire. (1986). “Group Processes in Computer Mediated Communication,”Organizational Behaviour and Human Decision Processes 37, 157–87.

    Google Scholar 

  • SimonM. A. (1977).The New Science of Management Decision. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

    Google Scholar 

  • ZigursI., M. S.Poole, and G. L.DeSanctis. (1988). “A Study of Influence in Computer-Mediated Group Decision Making,”MIS Quarterly 12(2), 625–644.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Stevens, C.A., Finlay, P.N. A research framework for group support systems. Group Decis Negot 5, 521–543 (1996). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00553916

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00553916

Key words

Navigation